Publication
date: April 1, 1994 Type: 12-page tabloid parody Object of Ridicule: The Stranger, free
weekly Seattle tabloid
Many were the times
in years gone past that I wished to pay my dear mom a compliment but found myself unable to chance
upon one that would befit both her behaviors and my busy schedule. That was before I
was taught an important lesson in caring by none other than a batch of idiot teens. A few years ago some spirited youngsters put together a
free teen sex-weekly called The Stranger which I neatly parodized during my lunch hour one lazy
afternoon. I had been intrigued by the way the teens had taken on the Task of Writing and come away
stunned, bloodied and eventually discarded by the English language like so much loose scurf and dander, and so I
lampooned those antics good-naturedly, after which I considered the issue closed, believing that
there was no more to be said on the matter since of course their response would not be intelligible.
Well, it seems I underestimated them. I was
spending the morning growing my publishing empire not long ago when comes my Fool to gingerly
place a rumpled tabloid onto my desk. Hmm.
Yellowish; queer smell. "Don't tell me." "Indeed,"
says he. "The Stranger. Seems that, unbeknownst to anyone -- and contrary to all accepted codes
of civility -- they've been publishing weekly for the last six months." Odd. "Thought I'd settled this matter." "Teens are stubborn, as you know." He indicated the
tabloid. "And curiously pragmatic. They just reprint the same articles, editorials and personal ads
each week. Cartoons change, of course." "Of
course." First rule of publishing. "But tell me, Fool: about the writing?" His lower lip began to tremble. "Each week e'er-worsening."
What say? From one issue to the next, the same
exact writing ... yet each week e'er-worsening? Impossible, of course; as I said, I had
underestimated them. I gently turned the mottled pages. Instantly my eyes began to sting and burn: O, sweet Muse of Letters! Fortunate that the
impieties committed against your name are not legible to you! I steeled myself and probed the
brutish print: cold, waxen parts of speech had been flung across the folio before me by some awful
accident in someone's mind, and spidery typographical errors, as if fleeing the scene, ran fully to
the edge of the page and beyond. My bleary gaze fell upon vulgarities so base and steeped in
commonness as to be unknown to me, and I could vaguely see, lurking in the ruins, a
rag-tag army of hackneyed phrases and even a cliché. I pushed the abomination from
me. [I'm not trying to imply that I actually read
any of it. I mean, it's a teen sex-weekly: no one reads it. Teens flip through it and pruriently
imagine what the words might be. So how do I know it's badly written? Funny question, really: a
20th-century twist on an age-old conundrum. You know how it goes: if a teen writes a story in the
forest, but there is no one there to read it, is it badly written? And philosophers long ago agreed
that yes, of course it is.] As I dabbed my eyes
with aloe balm I had to admit I felt flattered. It was obvious, of course, what had happened: the
teens had carefully examined my award-winning parody and had, not surprisingly, come to think of it
as a guide in the writing of free teen sex-weeklies. And it seemed they had taken careful heed of my
world-wisdom: for surely The Stranger had evolved to become a model of the genre, absolutely awful
and foul. But there was something twisted here.
Think about it: the only legitimate reason for producing a free teen sex-weekly is to ridicule those
who would do so, like I had done ... isn't that obvious? I mean, sure: my lampoon had been full of
language anomalies, curses and unpleasant imagery. But I was only kidding! The Stranger had been
produced using real teens, writing with real inability. It ridiculed nothing. Hundreds
of teens were exposed to it each week unaware of the incompetences to which they were being
subjected. This was my doing. It felt bad. There
was only one way to rectify the matter. I would have to ridicule them again. It was the only thing
that could make me feel better. "Round up some
teens, Fool. We're going to assemble the most exciting lack of talent in the industry. We'll need
pens, galley sheets, graphics, heroin." "Another
Stranger parody?" He scratched his head. "Don't know about that. I recommend you ease
off. If you keep ridiculing them like this you'll drive them out of business. And then whom
would you ridicule?" I recall smiling. "I suppose
then I would ridicule the unemployed," I said with a wink. It's good for morale when my employees challenge my ideas because
I win every time. I must confess that things did
not go as badly as I'd planned at first. And over the next two weeks I learned some important
life-lessons about how to reach down inside yourself to bring out the worst in others, and what I
realized is you can't use teens when you do this because their worst, like their best, is simply not
very good. My experience with young Jeffrey is illustrative: "There are problems with what you've
done here, Jeffrey. Nice. For example, an illiterate person writing a book review. One would like to ignore your recommendation ... but what book was it? Can't tell. And your
Ombudsman Column has an eerie, almost Sisyphean flavor to it, since you clearly don't know what an
ombudsman is. But as for the rest ... hmm. To be honest, Jeffrey, I found your Unsolvable
Word-Search Puzzle to be frankly more stimulating than regular ones; and I'm sorry, but your lengthy Sports Editorial did not make me vomit. And as for your bungled
Obituaries? I didn't know whether to laugh or to cry." I handed the manuscript back to him. "Three
times through the shredder." I use an old hand-crank shredder from the Antebellum period. Gives the
teens time to think and a little exercise, to boot. At one point I even had four of the teens form a popular local band and then come in and
sing one of their songs for me. I'll just use their bad lyrics, I thought. But when I set them down
on paper they came out as long strings of unarranged phonemes, and -- as I repeatedly explained to
them -- you have to be able to tell that it is writing in order to know that it is bad writing. I
had them all thrown in jail. Eventually I took a
crack at just doing the bad writing myself. But frankly I'm not suited for it. For example, I bashed
together a short op-ed piece praising the Seafair Parade and then rearranged all the words. Bet
that'll be bad writing, I thought. But I only ended up with some damn fine poetry. Great. That's all this troubled world needs right now.
Conundrum. And that's not the George Clark style. So what would a normal person do in a pickle such as this? I coursed the plush corridors of my office tower and pondered. I knew from my
reading that normal persons or executives in a pickle call their moms in a panic ... hmm. Could it
really be that simple? Of course. I couldn't use
someone who was simply "bad." There was the danger that he or she might improve over time. More
logical that my scribe's linguistic gifts be founded in a first-class, comprehensive genetic code.
Yes: the woman who is the wellspring of all things George Clark if in fact she is my real mom and
who had come to my assistance so many times over the years of my infancy. She's been my
mother for over 50 years now and I've never asked for or expected thanks but I've regularly asked
her to take on miscellaneous tasks. The Stranger
would once again feel my sting! I found a phone
and punched in the number from memory. Ring-ring. "Hello, cafeteria." Me:
"Take off that ridiculous apron and get up here. You've been promoted to Cashier in Charge of
Assigned Duties." She arrived soon thereafter and
placed a small item on my desk. "I stole a fruit cup for you." I smiled. She "stole" it for me? It would come out of her check. "Sit down, Eudora. Good to see you. On the table in
front of you lies a copy of The Stranger, an obscure sex-weekly for teens. You will read this
tabloid carefully, then design, write, edit and proof-read a 12-page parody of it." Dear sweet mom. She took off her bifocals, cleaned them on
her frock, replaced them tremulously and squinted at me as if to say, "My son needs my help with one
of his magazines." [Tabloid parody, actually. For God's sakes, Mother!] And I looked back at
her and said, "About the pull-out section in The Stranger? 'Rimming' is just another word for
'analingus.' Now get going." That night, while
locking up, I found her. Three in the morning, 10th floor of the paste-up building: there she was,
hunched over the light-table, wielding wax stick and razor and gauze and a lot of caring. I stepped
quietly in behind her and looked over her shoulder. I stared for a time at the pages beneath me
limned out in thin white light. And then from the far reaches of my lexicon I drew the bricks and
mortar of an accolade equal to the fine perfection here wrought. "Dear God. The writing is of an
empyrean badness unlike any ever beheld before by man; I expected no less. The advertisements
seemingly impugn the very services they are meant to promote. The typographical errors? They make no
sense and have no style. And the editorial opinion is simply wrong." And I reached out and tenderly touched her and then of course the
masterwork; and I laid the fruit cup beside her, bringing it full circle. So that's the story of how The Whimper
2 was born. I printed up 400,000 copies and released them to the public (after of course making
extensive corrections and rewriting the text in order to remove its many embarrassing grammatical,
semantic and stylistic blunders) and the rest is history.
|